Arkansas Blog

Senator Baker has already answered to his voters and they seemed satisfied with what he had to say. In fact, they were more satisfied with his answer than what the otherwise popular Mike Beebe had to say.

ARK. BLOG: Come on, Stump, You are usually better than this. Election means you no longer have to answer questions or endure criticism of your missteps? That sounds like Sarah Palin. Election isn't a free pass. For Baker or Beebe. This is about abuse of public trust. All of us have an interest, not just Baker's district.

That's a good question Max. Why don't you ask some agencies that administer the scholarships?

Are they claiming they are exempt from having to disclose or are exempt and cannot disclose?

The reply seemed worded in the "na nanna na na, we don't have to" vein.

I'm overwhelmed by the irony of how this has turned into a Max Brantley/Warrick Sabin battle for information on UCA!

while they cannot identify the student, there is nothing preventing them from releasing the number of students awarded these scholarships each semester, and the amounts.

reword your request and try again :)

actually, I don't think Baker has a higher interest than to represent his district first. Beebe has the responsibility for the entire state and should be the one (perhaps with Huckabee) to answer for this failure in higher ed.

If Baker has designs on higher office (congress, sec of state, or gov) then it is in his interest to make sure this failure in a state institution is revealed and corrected. If his children benefited then I wonder about the ethics implications.

But, for better or worse, his district did return him to office with a decent margin and that does provide him insulation from criticism from the outside. In fact that external criticism makes him stronger because voters see it transferred upon themselves since they voted to return him to Little Rock.

I'm not an expert on this law (or any other for that matter), but I suspect that when they release names of students on athletic scholarships, those students have already signed a waiver in order to fulfill the confidentiality law.

I don't think this information will get out short of a leak. It's a federal law, not a measly state one.

So perplexed, do you suppose these recipients signed an agreement to keep it under their hat as a way to protect the school from disclosure problems?

Every high school graduation they stand up each grad and list their scholarship offers, it doesn't seem all that private.

Public money handed out at a state school needs the light of day to insure against rampant corruption.

Max,
Why not call/email another Ark college and see if you get the same story.

We can hope they haven't read this one.

ARK. BLOG: At least some other colleges routinely ask students for waivers on enrollment to issue good news about the students, such as scholarships. I've asked UCA about their waiver policies. Scholarship news releases to hometown papers are a staple of college information offices. You can see, however, where UCA may not wish to announce:

"CONWAY -- Bud Tugley, son of Sen. Dewey Cheatham Tugley of Conway, has received a presidential discretionary scholarship to attend the University of Central Arkansas. These scholarships are awarded to those who know the money is available and whose connections to the president make them eligible for special consideration. Tugley also has received a special ranch-style house on campus and promise of a free wedding reception should he choose to use our union for the reception."

.

As far as I know under FERPA the university CANNOT disclose the names of those receiving these scholarships unless the students have given permission. If I'm wrong about FERPA, then under Arkansas law they seem to be obligated to. This seems to be a very nifty loophole for greasing pockets of influential people. Hypothetically of course, a university president is can be given discriminatory funds for scholarships, then give them to children of state congressmen, county judges, city mayors, or even US congressmen. Potential for corruption me thinks.

Citizen, the students don't have to sign a disclosure to keep it private. Matt is correct here. Due to the federal law, confidentiality is the default. They have to sign a waiver to allow the schools to release the info, not keep it private. I don't suspect that the recipients of these particular scholarships are going to be waiving their privilege in this case and the university certainly won't ask them for said waiver. In this case, the confidentiality serves both their purposes - even if it doesn't serve that of the public. Unfortunately, the accountability for these scholarships ultimately can be laid at the feet of the board of trustees. They are the only representative body with legal access to the records.

As to high school graduations, where do high schools get the information about who has received scholarships? From the students. It's not illegal to disclose your own information. And I suspect that third party scholarship donors are not covered under the provisions of this law.

I'm a professor at a state school. I can tell you that I'm not allowed to give out any information about a student without a signed consent form--not even to that student's parents, even if the parents are paying for the kid to come to school. "Is little Johnny studying? Is he getting good grades? Is he even showing up to class?" Sorry. FERPA, FERPA, FERPA.

"UPDATE: More's cooking on UCA, I believe. Predicted topic: installment payment plans for students. Most campuses offer such plans. It's in colleges' financial interest to be sure students meet their commitments to pay under these plans."

I am not sure what you are trying to dig up with this? UCA does have a payment plan, I know of several people who used the payment plan when I went there 2001-2005.

Hey Stump, not everyone in Baker's district voted for him. A large number of us DIDN'T and over issues just like this. I don't feel that he's been honest about the favors given to his children. Even if he didn't ASK, he should know to avoid the appearance of favoritism.